alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010134EN.01000601.xml

| 22.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 March 2010 — Trubowest Handel GmbH, Viktor Makarov v Council of the European Union, European Commission

(Case C-419/08 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Dumping - Regulation (EC) No 2320/97 imposing anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes - Non-contractual liability - Damage - Causal link)

2010/C 134/08

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Trubowest Handel GmbH (represented by: K. Adamantopoulos and E. Petritsi, dikigoroi), Viktor Makarov (represented by: K. Adamantopoulos and E. Petritsi, dikigoroi)

Appellants:

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, acting as Agent, assisted by G. Berrisch and G. Wolf, Rechtsanwälte), European Commission (represented by N. Khan and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of 9 July 2008 of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (Third Chamber) in Case T-429/04 Trubowest Handel and Makarov v Council and Commission, by which it dismissed an action for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the appellants as a result of the adoption of Council Regulation (EC) No 2320/97 of 17 November 1997 imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or non-alloy steel originating in Hungary, Poland, Russia, the Czech Republic, Romania and the Slovak Republic, repealing Regulation (EEC) No 1189/93 and terminating the proceeding in respect of such imports originating in the Republic of Croatia (OJ 1997 L 322, p. 1)

Trubowest Handel and Makarov

Council and Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal.

| 2. | Orders Trubowest Handel GmbH and Mr Makarov to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Trubowest Handel GmbH and Mr Makarov to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 285, 08.11.2008.

1

---
19886

#### State v. Balgas

Affirmed
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 108 (Wednesday, July 18, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H4915]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                                 PRAYER

  Reverend Dr. Stan Ballard, Nettleton Baptist Church, Jonesboro, 
Arkansas, offered the following prayer:
  Father in Heaven, thank You for this unique privilege You have given 
me today to pray and to ask Your blessings on the Congress of the 
United States. I pray for Your wisdom and guidance to be given to each 
Member of Congress. I pray for Your protection for them and their 
families.
  Please reveal to each of them that they have a great responsibility 
to vote and conduct themselves according to Your divine will and 
purpose. Show them that they are accountable not only to the voters, 
but to You, Almighty God.
  Thank You for the United States and the freedom and opportunities we 
enjoy as Americans. Thank You for allowing us to be blessed by Your 
omnipotent hand for over 236 years. Your purpose is for us to share 
Your blessings of love and grace to all people. We pray for a strong 
economy and for national unity. We are blessed because You are our God.
  In Jesus' name, amen.

                          ____________________
```
LOUIS ROBERT SANTIAGO, as Trustee of the Louis Robert Santiago Revocable Living Trust dated November 17, 1999, as amended, and YONG HWAN SANTIAGO, as Trustee of the Yong Shimabukuro Recoverable Living Trust dated July 25, 1996, as amended, Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellants/Cross-Appellees,

vs.

RUTH TANAKA, Respondent/Defendant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Upon consideration of Respondent/DefendantAppellee/Cross-Appellant Ruth Tanaka’s motion for stay of

judgment, filed on April 19, 2016, after this court entered Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-11-0000697 17-MAY-2016 01:37 PM

SCWC-11-0000697

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-11-0000697; CIVIL NO. 08-1-0094)

ORDER DISMISSING MOTION FOR STAY OF JUDGMENT (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)judgment, the papers in support thereof, and the records and

files herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, May 17, 2016.

Gary Victor Dubin and Frederick J. Arensmeyer for petitioner /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

Robert Goldberg for respondent /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
#### The Shepard Paint Co. et al., Appellants, *v.*Board of Trustees of Franklin County Veterans Memorial et al., Appellees.

(No. 32245

Decided May 12, 1950.)

*Messrs. Wright, Harlor, Purpus, Morris & Arnold*and *Mr. John E. Summers,*for appellants.

*Mr. Ralph J. Bartlett,*prosecuting attorney, *Mr. Robert P. Barnhart*and *Mr. Joseph J. Poorman,*for appellees.

It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Stewart and Turner, JJ., concur.
Q!ongres.a nf t4e 1llniteb ~tates 

lt!fasl}ington, mar 20515 

The Honorable Anthony Foxx 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Mr. Secretary: 

March 31, 2014 

We write to you regarding the foreign air carrier application of Norwegian Air International Limited (NAI). 

We are concerned that NAI's "flag of convenience" structure violates the U.S.-EU Open Skies Agreement as 

well as federal statutes that ensure foreign air carrier operations in the United States are in the public interest 

and uphold fair labor standards. 

The Department of Transportation (DOT} has a strong record of negotiating air transport agreements, 

including the U.S.-EU Open Skies Agreement, which have increased international competition and expanded 

aviation market access while maintaining strong employment protections. Indeed, Article 17 bis of the U.S.-

EU Open Skies Agreement states, "The opportunities created by the Agreement are not intended to 

undermine labour standards or the labour-related rights and principles contained in the Parties' respective 

laws.'' This is consistent with U.S. law that requires the DOT to apply, among other factors, a public interest 

standard to make sure that U.S. air carriers are on at least an equal footing with foreign carriers when 

reviewing and approving applications from foreign air carriers to provide new air service. 

We believe that NAI's business model would weaken existing U.S. and EU employment protections. NAI's 

parent company is based in Norway, and NAI is owned and controlled by Norwegian citizens. However, 

NAI will operate as an Irish air carrier, even though it does not plan to operate any flights in Ireland at this 

time. Furthennore, it is our understanding that NAI plans to hire at least some of its workforce through a 

recruitment firm based in Singapore, which is not a party to the U.S.-EU Open Skies agreement. NAI's 

structure raises several serious questions about what employment protections will apply to NAI's workforce 

and whether this arrangement was created to allow the airline to avoid the more rigorous Norwegian labor 

and employment laws. 

We support competition and increased consumer choice, but not by unfairly disadvantaging U.S. airlines or 

threatening U.S. jobs. Due to NAI's operating structure, we do not believe its application complies with 

Article 17 bis or relevant federal statutes. Accordingly, we request that NAI's application be denied. 

Sincerely, 

~ Member of Congress 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPf.R 

s 10-140331-025
# C_2009113EN.01002803.xml

| 16.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 113/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 113/28

---

Order of the President of the Court of 19 February 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-92/08) (1)

1

2009/C 113/53

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 116, 9.5.2008.

1

---
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                  EXHIBIT 11.1
                              EASTON BANCORP, INC.
                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                          QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2001


<S>                                                     <C>
Net income                                              $  100,419
                                                        ==========


Average shares outstanding                                 560,318

Basic earnings per share                                $     0.18
                                                        ==========


Average shares outstanding                                 560,318

Dilutive average shares outstanding under
  warrants and options                                     263,800

Exercise price                                          $    10.00

Assumed proceeds on exercise                            $2,638,000

Average market value                                    $    10.28

Less:   Treasury stock purchased with assumed proceeds
        from exercise of warrants and options              256,615

Adjusted average shares - diluted                          567,503

Diluted earnings per share                              $     0.18
                                                        ==========
</TABLE>

     The stock of the Company is not traded on any public exchange.  The average
market  value  is  derived from trades with one broker.  Private sales may occur
where  management  of  the  Company  is  unaware  of  the  sales  price.


<PAGE>
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-13-0003147 16-JAN-2014 10:29 AM
U
.S

. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration



### SEP 1 72015

Mr. Robert Glasscock Director, ODA Programs Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation PO Box 2206 Savannah, Georgia 31402-2206 Dear Mr. Glasscock: Transport Airplane Directorate 1601 Lind Avenue , S.W

. Renton , Washington 98057-3356

We have received your petition letter dated August 14, 2015, requesting exemption from § 25.809(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), at amendment 25-116. This exemption, if granted , would permit relief from the requirement for a means of viewing the likely areas ofthe evacuee ground contact prior to opening the overwing emergency exits on Gulfstream Model GVII-G500 airplanes. This request was posted to the Department ofTransportation ' s Federal Docket Management System (at Regulations
.gov) on September 11 , 2015 , and has been assigned Docket No. FAA-2015-3595. We are in the process ofreviewing your request. We will contact you if we need additional information
. If you have any questions or concerns regarding your petition or the petition process, please contact Mr. Dan Jacquet by telephone at (425) 227-2676 , or by e-mail at Daniel.Jacquet @ faa. gov. Sincerely,

Deana M. Stedman Transport Airplane Directorate Aircraft Certification Service
October 30, 2000

22823

#### Alberts v. AIG, Inc.; Riveira v. AIG, Inc.; Balagso v. AIG, Inc.

Affirmed
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5321]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                          PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

  The Honorable Kirsten E. Gillibrand led the Pledge of Allegiance, as 
follows:

       I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of 
     America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation 
     under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

                          ____________________
```
Exhibit 10.1




  


Sport Endurance, Inc.


222 Broadway, 19th Floor


New York, NY 11201







January __, 2017







______________


______________


______________







Re:          Sports Endurance, Inc. / Forbearance on Senior Secured Promissory Note







Dear Sirs:







This letter agreement (the “Agreement”) acknowledges that in exchange for Sport Endurance, Inc. (the “Company”) (i) paying you the sum of $50,000 paid toward the sums due under the 10% Senior Secured Promissory Notes executed and delivered by the Company to _____________ (“______”) (the “Senior Note”), and (ii) a $7,500 penalty to be applied to the principal sum due under the Senior note, ______ agrees that the due date under the Senior Note shall be extended to 5:00 pm on February 15, 2017 (the “Due Date”).  If the Senior Note is not paid in full, including principal, interest and penalties, the $50,000 shall be added to the principal of the Senior Note.  Notwithstanding any cure provision in the Senior Note, such cure provision shall be null and void.







Without modifying or amending the terms of the Senior Note, the Security Agreement or the Securities Purchase Agreement, ______ agrees to forebear and not to seek collection against the Company of any amounts due under the Senior Note, Security Agreement or Securities Purchase Agreement through and until the Due Date. The period of forbearance provided in this Agreement shall terminate on the Due Date if the amount due under the Senior Note is not paid within that period.







Except as modified by this Agreement, the Company hereby ratifies and confirms the terms and provisions of the Senior Note, the Security Agreement and the Securities Purchase Agreement. The Senior Note, Security Agreement, Securities Purchase Agreement and all other agreements, instruments and other documents executed in connection with the obligations of the Company under the Senior Note are legal, valid, binding and enforceable against the Company in accordance with their terms.







Any number of counterparts of this Agreement may be signed and delivered, each of which shall be considered an original and all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.







Please sign below evidencing your agreement to be bound by this Agreement and return to us.





















Very truly yours,

















_________________________


David Lelong


President and CEO












We hereby agree to the foregoing:






















By:                                                                             


Name:


Title:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 28, 1996 FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                              15
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      396
<ALLOWANCES>                                        70
<INVENTORY>                                        604
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   949
<PP&E>                                           1,159
<DEPRECIATION>                                     288
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,820
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,805
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           413
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,128)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,820
<SALES>                                          1,993
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,993
<CGS>                                            1,603
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      475
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  31
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (116)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (116)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (116)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)
        

</TABLE>
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-19-00393-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 3

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-000305-3

Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Gabriel, J.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

MICHAEL A. FARRIS AND VOF PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellants

V.

LARRY BAYS, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered the parties’ “Joint Motion to Set Aside Judgment and 

Remand to Trial Court Pursuant to Settlement Agreement.” It is the court’s opinion 

that the motion should be granted. Therefore, we reinstate this appeal, set aside the 

trial court’s judgment and nunc pro tunc judgment without regard to the merits, and 

remand this case to the trial court to render judgment in accordance with the parties’ 

agreement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B); Innovative Office Sys., Inc. v. Johnson, 911 

S.W. 2d 387, 388 (Tex. 1995).

Appellants must pay all costs of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: February 6, 2020
# C_2009141EN.01003503.xml

| 20.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/35

---

Order of the President of the Court of 2 March 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-294/08) (1)

1

2009/C 141/68

Language of the case: Czech

Language of the case: Czech

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 247, 27.9.2008.

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1378-1379 (Review)]

## Determinations

                    On the basis of the record [1]                                          developed in the subject five-year reviews, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on low melt polyester staple fiber from South Korea and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.                

## Background

The Commission instituted these reviews on July 3, 2023 (88 FR 42688) and determined on October 6, 2023 that it would conduct expedited reviews (88 FR 73870, October 27, 2023).

                    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its determinations in these reviews on December 13, 2023. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5480 (December 2023), entitled                     *Low Melt Polyester Staple Fiber from South Korea and Taiwan: Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1378-1379 (Review).*

By order of the Commission.

Issued: December 13, 2023.

Lisa Barton,

Secretary to the Commission.

# Footnotes

1.                             The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2023-27778 Filed 12-18-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
APHIS Approved Offshore Greenhouse Certification Program for 

Unrooted Vegetative Cuttings Facilities as of April 4, 2024 

Unrooted vegetative cuttings from approved generally admissible plant taxa may only be sent to 

United States PPQ plant inspection stations if sent from one of the approved facilities authorized to 

participate in the offshore greenhouse certification program listed in Table 1 below. See the USDAAPHIS-PPQ Offshore Greenhouse Certification Program and Offshore Greenhouse Certification 

Program Framework for information about the program. Refer to the Plants for Planting Manual for 

information about generally admissible plant taxa. 

Table 1 List of Approved Facilities Authorized to Participate in the Offshore Greenhouse Certification 

Program for Unrooted Vegetative Cuttings 

Country Facility Name Facility Number Approved Address 

Colombia Darwin Colombia SAS 00001403 Calle 123 # 11b-21 

Apto 203 

Bogotá, Colombia 

Costa Rica InnovaPlant de Costa Rica S.A. 1059 800 Mts. Norte del Estadio 

Eliecer Perez 

Sarchi Norte, Alajuela, Costa 

Rica 

TicoPlant TSA S.A. 1709 Canoas de Alajuela 

PO Box 217 

4060 Alajuela 

Costa Rica 

Mexico Vivero Internacional, S.A. de C.V.— 

Casasano 

OCMEX02 Azucenas #51 A, 62445 

Cuernavaca, Moreles 

Mexico 

Nicaragua Las Limas 5582515000042 Carretera Panamericana Km 153 

Esteli 

Nicaragua 

04/2024-11 Approved Offshore Greenhouse Certification Program for Unrooted Vegetative Cuttings Facilities 1
# C_2020399EN.01001501.xml

| 23.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 October 2020 — Cham Holding Co. SA v Council of the European Union

(Case C-261/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against the Syrian Arab Republic - Measures directed against certain persons and entities engaged in activities in Syria - List of persons and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Inclusion of the appellant’s name - Action for annulment)

(2020/C 399/19)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Cham Holding Co. SA (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and S. Kyriakopoulou, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Cham Holding Co. SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Cham Holding Co. SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 187, 3.6.2019.

---
#### State v. Tamayo

20427

12/7/98

Vacated & Remanded